Any game attempting to ape Portal has one simple test to pass: Is it better than playing fan levels for Portal 2 for the same length of time? You'd think the test would be "is this game better than or on par with Portal 1 or 2?", but time has only shown just how pointless a question is when the answer is always "no". So instead I think it's fairer to compare to the fan content built in the actual skeleton of Portal. And honestly, the Turing Test fails that test entirely.
What's here is pretty weak honestly. The puzzles are adequate enough, but do nothing that hasn't been done a thousand times before. Many mechanics are cribbed directly from Portal with often no changes at all, such as weighted boxes and ligtbridges. The only time I found myself stuck for any amount of time was in one optional puzzle, the reward for which was so pointless that I almost wished I hadn't bothered. The big issue with the Turing Test is it has too many mechanics, and none of them are fleshed out or interesting enough to be considered central. The game consistently introduces new puzzle tools every few levels right to its very end, meaning that most of the puzzles feel like tutorials rather than genuine headscratchers.
But the puzzles aren't awful. They're passable, on the level of your fairly mindless newspaper faire, with some lateral thinking occasionally required. What of the story then? Sadly, it's no better. A nonsensical sandwich of exposition philosophy 101 thought experiments humorlessly discussed with a dull AI. All building up to a final moral quandary that feels like someone thought the trolley problem was too balanced and needed to be easier.
Again, I want to say I don't hate the Turing Test, it's a decent enough first effort, but it's copying its homework from one of the best games of all time and as a result fails to bring anything interesting to the table. Play any other Portal clone, or hell, just replay Portal for the fiftieth time and ignore the Turing Test.
What's here is pretty weak honestly. The puzzles are adequate enough, but do nothing that hasn't been done a thousand times before. Many mechanics are cribbed directly from Portal with often no changes at all, such as weighted boxes and ligtbridges. The only time I found myself stuck for any amount of time was in one optional puzzle, the reward for which was so pointless that I almost wished I hadn't bothered. The big issue with the Turing Test is it has too many mechanics, and none of them are fleshed out or interesting enough to be considered central. The game consistently introduces new puzzle tools every few levels right to its very end, meaning that most of the puzzles feel like tutorials rather than genuine headscratchers.
But the puzzles aren't awful. They're passable, on the level of your fairly mindless newspaper faire, with some lateral thinking occasionally required. What of the story then? Sadly, it's no better. A nonsensical sandwich of exposition philosophy 101 thought experiments humorlessly discussed with a dull AI. All building up to a final moral quandary that feels like someone thought the trolley problem was too balanced and needed to be easier.
Again, I want to say I don't hate the Turing Test, it's a decent enough first effort, but it's copying its homework from one of the best games of all time and as a result fails to bring anything interesting to the table. Play any other Portal clone, or hell, just replay Portal for the fiftieth time and ignore the Turing Test.
Pantz
10 days ago